PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ISF.L vs. CMB1.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ISF.L vs. CMB1.L

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

ISF.L (iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF (Dist)) and CMB1.L (iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)) are both Europe Equities funds from iShares - ISF.L tracks the FTSE AllSh TR GBP while CMB1.L tracks the FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ISF.L returned 9.77%/yr vs 17.45%/yr for CMB1.L. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ISF.L charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CMB1.L.

Performance

ISF.L vs. CMB1.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF (Dist) (ISF.L) and iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ISF.L achieves a 7.91% return, which is significantly lower than CMB1.L's 16.99% return. Over the past 10 years, ISF.L has underperformed CMB1.L with an annualized return of 9.77%, while CMB1.L has yielded a comparatively higher 17.45% annualized return.

ISF.L

1D
0.83%
1M
0.48%
YTD
7.91%
6M
8.59%
1Y
24.32%
3Y*
16.21%
5Y*
12.02%
10Y*
9.77%

CMB1.L

1D
0.03%
1M
3.29%
YTD
16.99%
6M
17.62%
1Y
38.46%
3Y*
29.77%
5Y*
20.58%
10Y*
17.45%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ISF.L vs. CMB1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ISF.L
iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF (Dist)		7.91%25.97%9.28%7.81%4.83%17.68%-11.67%17.11%-8.96%13.10%
CMB1.L
iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)		16.99%43.83%13.25%30.68%-3.56%18.29%1.52%24.83%-13.79%22.48%

Correlation

The correlation between ISF.L and CMB1.L is 0.61, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.61

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.63

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.67

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.66

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2010

0.67

The correlation between ISF.L and CMB1.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

ISF.L vs. CMB1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
ISF.L
CMB1.L

Financial Services

25.3%
47.2%

Industrials

14.2%
11.1%

Healthcare

13.5%
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

12.8%
0.4%

Energy

10.9%
7.2%

Basic Materials

9.1%
0.5%

Consumer Cyclical

5.1%
9.2%

Utilities

4.9%
15.3%

Communication Services

2.6%
1.8%

Real Estate

0.9%
0.3%

Technology

0.8%
6.0%

Financial Services

ISF.L
25.3%
CMB1.L
47.2%

Industrials

ISF.L
14.2%
CMB1.L
11.1%

Healthcare

ISF.L
13.5%
CMB1.L
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

ISF.L
12.8%
CMB1.L
0.4%

Energy

ISF.L
10.9%
CMB1.L
7.2%

Basic Materials

ISF.L
9.1%
CMB1.L
0.5%

Consumer Cyclical

ISF.L
5.1%
CMB1.L
9.2%

Utilities

ISF.L
4.9%
CMB1.L
15.3%

Communication Services

ISF.L
2.6%
CMB1.L
1.8%

Real Estate

ISF.L
0.9%
CMB1.L
0.3%

Technology

ISF.L
0.8%
CMB1.L
6.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF (Dist)

iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)

Often compared with ISF.L:
ISF.L vs. VUKE.LISF.L vs. HUKX.LISF.L vs. UKDV.LISF.L vs. XDAX.LISF.L vs. VUSA.ASISF.L vs. VOOISF.L vs. FEUI.L
Often compared with CMB1.L:
CMB1.L vs. XDEM.LCMB1.L vs. H50E.LCMB1.L vs. IITU.LCMB1.L vs. SPYCMB1.L vs. IQSA.LCMB1.L vs. X7PP.LCMB1.L vs. EQQQ.L

Return for Risk

ISF.L vs. CMB1.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
ISF.L
ISF.L Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
ISF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ISF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
ISF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
ISF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
ISF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank
CMB1.L
CMB1.L Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
CMB1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CMB1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
CMB1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
CMB1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
CMB1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

ISF.L vs. CMB1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF (Dist) (ISF.L) and iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.L). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

ISF.LCMB1.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.20
2.54

-0.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.06
3.42

-0.36

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.44

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.74

3.71

-0.97

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.85

13.55

-4.70

ISF.L vs. CMB1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ISF.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.20, which is comparable to the CMB1.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ISF.L and CMB1.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

ISF.L vs. CMB1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ISF.L drawdown since its inception was -45.00%, smaller than the maximum CMB1.L drawdown of -56.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISF.L and CMB1.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ISF.LCMB1.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-45.00%

-56.05%

+11.05%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.82%

-10.32%

+1.50%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.69%

-15.62%

+2.93%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-12.69%

-24.19%

+11.50%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.13%

-36.61%

+2.48%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.28%

-2.84%

+0.56%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.45%

-15.20%

+8.75%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.74%

2.83%

-0.09%

Volatility

ISF.L vs. CMB1.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF (Dist) (ISF.L) is 3.04%, while iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.L) has a volatility of 3.96%. This indicates that ISF.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMB1.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ISF.LCMB1.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.04%

3.96%

-0.92%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.48%

12.40%

-2.92%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.02%

15.07%

-4.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.57%

18.01%

-5.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.75%

20.12%

-5.37%

ISF.L vs. CMB1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ISF.L has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than CMB1.L's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

ISF.L vs. CMB1.L - Dividend Comparison

ISF.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.97%, while CMB1.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CMB1.L
iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
ISF.L
iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF (Dist)		2.97%3.01%3.71%3.86%3.75%3.76%3.11%4.47%4.44%3.96%3.79%4.12%

Frequently Asked Questions

ISF.L and CMB1.L have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ISF.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ISF.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CMB1.L.

ISF.L tracks FTSE AllSh TR GBP, while CMB1.L tracks FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for ISF.L and 0.33% for CMB1.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ISF.L and CMB1.L

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer